MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185079129 · doi:10.2196/24352

Using Acoustic Speech Patterns From Smartphones to Investigate Mood Disorders: Scoping Review

2021· article· en· W3185079129 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AucklandPennsylvania State University
KeywordsMoodCINAHLPsycINFOMood disordersMEDLINEModalitiesPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicineComputer scienceApplied psychologyPsychiatryPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mood disorders are commonly underrecognized and undertreated, as diagnosis is reliant on self-reporting and clinical assessments that are often not timely. Speech characteristics of those with mood disorders differs from healthy individuals. With the wide use of smartphones, and the emergence of machine learning approaches, smartphones can be used to monitor speech patterns to help the diagnosis and monitoring of mood disorders. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to synthesize research on using speech patterns from smartphones to diagnose and monitor mood disorders. METHODS: Literature searches of major databases, Medline, PsycInfo, EMBASE, and CINAHL, initially identified 832 relevant articles using the search terms "mood disorders", "smartphone", "voice analysis", and their variants. Only 13 studies met inclusion criteria: use of a smartphone for capturing voice data, focus on diagnosing or monitoring a mood disorder(s), clinical populations recruited prospectively, and in the English language only. Articles were assessed by 2 reviewers, and data extracted included data type, classifiers used, methods of capture, and study results. Studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis approach. RESULTS: Studies showed that voice data alone had reasonable accuracy in predicting mood states and mood fluctuations based on objectively monitored speech patterns. While a fusion of different sensor modalities revealed the highest accuracy (97.4%), nearly 80% of included studies were pilot trials or feasibility studies without control groups and had small sample sizes ranging from 1 to 73 participants. Studies were also carried out over short or varying timeframes and had significant heterogeneity of methods in terms of the types of audio data captured, environmental contexts, classifiers, and measures to control for privacy and ambient noise. CONCLUSIONS: Approaches that allow smartphone-based monitoring of speech patterns in mood disorders are rapidly growing. The current body of evidence supports the value of speech patterns to monitor, classify, and predict mood states in real time. However, many challenges remain around the robustness, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability of such an approach and further work is required to build on current research and reduce heterogeneity of methodologies as well as clinical evaluation of the benefits and risks of such approaches.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.148
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it